Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1545239

Re: kernel/bpf/verifier.c: 4 * possible unintended fallthrough ?

From Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: kernel/bpf/verifier.c: 4 * possible unintended fallthrough ?
Date 2016-12-20 17:20 +0100
Message-ID <sQviW-7Qa-45@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <sQviW-7Qa-47@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:20 AM, David Binderman <dcb314@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> I just tried to compile kernel-4.9 with a recent development
> version of gcc. It said
>
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1907:23: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1918:23: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1859:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c:1869:24: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>
> Source code for the first one is
>
>     case BPF_JGT:
>         /* Unsigned comparison, the minimum value is 0. */
>         true_reg->min_value = 0;
>     case BPF_JSGT:
>
> Suggest either add the missing break or document the fallthrough
> with a comment something like /* FALLTHROUGH */

I've tried 4.9 and 5.2 and don't see this warning.
Is this 6.x gcc?
I suspect it will have such warnings all over the kernel.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: kernel/bpf/verifier.c: 4 * possible unintended fallthrough ? Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> - 2016-12-20 17:20 +0100

csiph-web